Income Tax : Smt. Ranjana Kumari/Kalta Vs DCIT/ACIT (Central) (ITAT Chandigarh) The appeals involved three assessees belonging to the Kalta Gro...
Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that reliance on third-party statements without granting effective cross-examination amounted to a violation of ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an addition under Section 69A cannot be sustained when the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-exami...
Income Tax : Income without satisfactory explanation is taxed at a special high rate under Section 115BBE. The provisions place strict liabilit...
Corporate Law : Details on Indian government's blocking of YouTube channels, citing IT Rules 2021 and Section 69A of IT Act 2000. Learn about reas...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore remanded a Section 69A addition after holding that an APMC commission agent's entire sale proceeds could not be tre...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore deleted the Section 69A addition after holding that member details established the source of cash deposits made dur...
Income Tax : ITAT held that negative cash balances do not automatically establish undisclosed income and upheld addition only to the peak negat...
Income Tax : ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D cannot survive where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessme...
Income Tax : ITAT Allahabad held that estimating gross profit solely on the basis of the subsequent years GP rate is not justified after reject...
Income Tax : CBDT has instructed tax officers to uniformly apply Sections 68 to 69D and Section 115BBE after a C&AG audit found inconsistencies...
Pilani Industrial Corporation Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) case analysis. The ITAT Delhi ruled that cash deposits during demonetization can’t be deemed unexplained without rejecting the books of account. Full text of the order included.
ITAT Chennai rules that recoveries of farmers’ advances reflected in cash books are not unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT held that Indian Women Traditionally Keep Jewelry at Maternal Home for Various Reasons and CBDT instruction, where the status of the family and customs and practices of the community to which family belongs, permit an assessee to hold larger quantity of jewellery and ornaments out of the purview of seizure.
ITAT Chennai analyzes the applicability of Section 115BBE to seized cash and gold coins in the case of Uthangarai Sri Vidya Mandir Educational Trust. The trust argued that Section 115BBE applies only if no explanation is provided for the income.
The Delhi High Court ruled that once a TPO issues an order, the AO must pass an assessment order per Section 92CA(4) of the Income Tax Act.
Understand the ITAT Bangalore ruling on Sudarshan Purushothama Vs ITO, where addition u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act was contested regarding bank statement monies.
Discover why not every deposit during demonetization is deemed unaccounted cash. Detailed analysis of Narayanappa Munikrishnappa Vs ITO case remitted for fresh consideration by ITAT.
Appellant contended that since he had filed income tax returns under section 44AD of the Act, which does not require maintenance of books of account, section 69A was not applicable.
In the Satishbhai Kadvabhai Sarvaiya Vs ITO case, ITAT Rajkot rules that during demonetization, deposits don’t warrant addition under U/s 69A if adequately explained.
Hyderabad ITAT grants additional opportunity to taxpayer to explain nature & source of cash deposits made during demonetization. Read full text.
